And succeeds wonderfully, I would say.
(Voters in Jim McDermott's district may be less amused than those outside his district.)
Posted by Jim Miller at June 18, 2009 02:53 PM | Email ThisI'm not.
Actually, the vast majority of folks don't know and frankly don't care who people like McDermott are. It's only the political junkies like us who give a rip.
Hence, we get the government we deserve.
My colleague told me you called while I was away at the Ladies' room. I do sometimes leave my desk.~ Liz Becton
...sounds like a perfect venue to remove that stick, Liz.
Speaking of which, Barbara Boxer did the same thing to a Military General at a senate hearing yesterday. Hint to Ms. Boxer: The military uses "Sir" and "Ma'am" instictively. You're really not that special, so get over yourself already.
And her salary was too high.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on June 18, 2009 10:49 PMFor once, I agree with Torture Lawyer. Public servants, especially a glorified admin assistant like Ms. Becton, shouldn't be making this kind of money. This is what gives them the ego to think they can waste the tax payers time sending 19 OCD e-mails back and forth with an over-apologetic aide obssessing over the simple misuse of her first name.
source:Elizabeth J Becton , Congressional Staffer - Salary Data
Rep. Jim McDermott (-Washington-7th)
10/01/08 - 12/31/08
Executive Assistant/Office Manager
$27,366.66
FY 2009 subtotal: $27,366.66
Rep. Jim McDermott (-Washington-7th)
07/01/08 09/30/08
Executive Assistant/Office Manager
$20,700.00
Rep. Jim McDermott (-Washington-7th)
04/01/08 06/30/08
Executive Assistant/Office Manager
$20,700.00
Rep. Jim McDermott (-Washington-7th)
01/05/08 03/31/08
Executive Assistant/Office Manager
$19,577.78
FY 2008 subtotal: $60,977.78
You nailed it. People who are out to make others do their bidding are very often angry, unhappy, mean, and judgmental.
They don't realize that life is difficult enough but much better when you resolve to mind your own business, take care of yourself,
and contribute to the betterment of the world rather than trying to manipulate it to your will.
If Becton had been working for a Republican, she would have likely been fired because most Republicans won't tolerate deliberately mean spirited people in their midst. Republicans are more likely to help the public than dictate to them. It is quite true that conservatives (as a group) are happier and more well adjusted people because they are grounded in faith, honesty, an integrity and they are less likely to chase illusions. Instead they focus on truly useful benefits for humanity like capitalism.
In contrast Liberals are all about trying to save the world from itself (global warming), re-invent reality (that socialism is a viable national economic model) defy human nature (that Diplomacy can ever replace military action), and change fundamental principles,(that humans learn and function better by being deliberately lied to). Most of these people actually believe that a well told lie is equal to the truth. They are driven to justify inherent dishonesty by telling themselves that they are only doing it to vindicate social "equality," or equality of outcomes.
Bill, I imagine that you would also be angry, unhappy, mean, and judgmental if your whole belief system was based on justifying lies.
McDermott and Becton were made for each other.
A staffer gets uppity with a JP Morgan Chase lobbyist over her name, and we go on a tirade against 'liberals'?
In the mean time, another Republican lawmaker and supposed conservative resigns alleging extortion from his former staff members because he has had an affair with the lady staff member, AND admits to assisting in the placing the former staff members with a lobbying firm.
No doubt Becton comes off like a rude idiot.
No doubt McDermott comes off like a fool to Republicans for allowing such behavior.
But there is no impact on McDermott's responsibilities to his voting constituents, and it is highly unlikely this 'episode' swings one vote even from employees of JP Morgan Chase.
How many more elections must be lost before conservative Republicans first police their own?
How is it that conservatives are concerned at all with this behavior and say nothing about Vitter's escapades with prostitutes in light of Ensign's ridiculous situation?
While the Republican Gov of NV will likely appoint a Republican to Replace Ensign, the resulting special election in 2010 will at least have the effect of giving Reid a pass in 2010, and introduces the very real possibility of another Dem Senate pick-up.
Maybe our time would be better spent understanding the qualifications and salaries of the 2 WA Republican Congress people before another seemingly routine ethical collapse happens here.
If Becton had been working for a Republican, she would have likely been fired because most Republicans won't tolerate deliberately mean spirited people in their midst.
She has worked for republicans for the eight of the last nine years. But don't let logic get in the way of your irrational hatred.
Liz is clearly a very unpleasant person, but it has nothing to do with her ideology.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 11:03 AMIf a Republican or conservative does something bad or dumb, he/she is blasted by everyone on both the left AND THE RIGHT. It makes headlines everywhere.
If a Democrat or liberal does something bad or dumb, he/she is blasted by those on the right fortunate enough to have even heard of the incident. There is rarely a peep from the left or the MSM.
Posted by: Seabecker on June 19, 2009 11:07 AMIt's just like an anti-American, un-democratic liberal to not know that. Oh, sorry, just trying to fit in with the irrational hatred here.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 11:08 AMBeen smoking crack again eh? Here is a hint, you ought not tell Republicans to "Police their own" when in fact they do just that (Tom Delay - Gone by Republicans, Trent Lott - gone by Republicans).
It would be nice if instead of promoting him to the Homeland Sec Committee, William Jefferson (D-LA) was policed. Perhaps if Charles Rangel (D-NY) who chairs Ways and Means and is a tax cheat was policed by his own party, you mikght have a point. Perhaps if the man who oversees the IRS wasn't a Democrat tax cheat, your rant would have meaning.
What makes Liz's rudeness such an issue is the Demcrat meme that they are "for the people". Clearly this woman is only for herself and all us peons, you know "the people", had better learn our place.
Posted by: pbj on June 19, 2009 11:12 AMThere is neither a need nor a electorally significant reason to get in a tit-for-tat with Democrats over the smallest of issues. In addition to being irrelevant, doing so in 2009 makes Republicans looks petty. Emphasizing the petty mistakes of the opposition at a time our own house is not in order makes Republicans look very hypocritical.
In the age of the internet, there is less and less need to depend upon or rely upon the MSM to police our own.
As much as frequenters of this site bemoan it, we could take a page from the likes of DailyKos and others on how to police our own. Murtha gets no peace from Kos, et al.
If ever growing Democrat majorities are not want we want, then focusing precious time and effort needs to be better spent than getting up in arms about a rude staffer.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on June 19, 2009 11:17 AMWe just had a thread where Amused by Liberals said that Tom DeLay, Ted Stevens, and Scooter Libby didn't deserve any of their court cases. David Vitter still sits in the Senate. Don Young still sits in the House.
If a Democrat or liberal does something bad or dumb, he/she is blasted by those on the right fortunate enough to have even heard of the incident. There is rarely a peep from the left or the MSM.
That is such a stupid thing to say. John Edwards? Bill Clinton? Tom Daschle? Were any of these cases unreported by the MSM? Nope.
Republicans have just had some shitty politicians recently, making bigger mistakes. Some day within the next decade we'll have a big corruption scandal with mostly democrats -- assuming they maintain power -- too. (Republicans came to Washington to change it, but Washington changed them, according to Senator McCain.) So stop creating arbitrary, partisan distinctions.
Liz may or may not be a Democrat. She may be a Republican. She's worked mostly for Republicans during her career. And I heard about this story first on the website Seattle's most liberal paper, The Stranger, and POLITICO broke the story. This isn't a very important issue since she isn't a public official, that's why it's not the same as Ensign sleeping with his staffer. Also, Ensign was a member of the GOP leadership
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 11:18 AMAgain, Liz worked for Republicans for eight of the last nine years.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 11:23 AMWhat did Trent Lott do to need to be removed as Senate Majority Leader?
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on June 19, 2009 11:25 AM-
John Edwards' affair was not reported by the MSM. The MSM (Newsweek) had decided to kill the Monica story, and then it got leaked to Drudge.
Daschle?
It required the National Enquirer to report the Edwards affair.
Posted by: Gary on June 19, 2009 11:26 AMe.g. Jensen's sourced comment showing this woman's experience as totally Republican prior to McDermott, and that she was paid more by the Republican who employed her last than she is paid now.
but hey..... rant on. Maybe staffers treating bank lobbyists rudely is the issue to take to the Dems in WA in 2010. :-/
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on June 19, 2009 12:12 PM
....or lack thereof.
Posted by: Saltherring on June 19, 2009 12:17 PMAs long as we all let this crap happen without consequence the worse it will get.
Posted by: G Jiggy on June 19, 2009 12:23 PMBarbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, and let's not forget the way Democrats continue to savage Sarah Palin.
Remember, this is the Party that is so opposed to opposing points of view that they are scheming to get conservative talk radio off the air.
Do I think McDermott would hire a Republican? I seriously doubt it.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 12:34 PMI agree with your point that arrogance on the part of any elected official towards the electorate (the tax payers!) requires constant vigilance, but the Bechton and Boxer events really don't meet that criteria.
Bechton got snippy with a bank lobbyist.
Boxer demanded a General use her title.
These two 'offended' (???) people are in the class of seeking business before a government official and reporting to a government official.
On the other hand, was there even a peep from the conservative blogosphere when SEN Craig tried to pull rank, wrongly, on the cop who issued him a citation?
Focus people.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on June 19, 2009 12:36 PM"Bechton got snippy with a bank lobbyist.
Boxer demanded a General use her title.
These two 'offended' (???) people are in the class of seeking business before a government official and reporting to a government official."
What a revealing comment. Classic.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 12:52 PM"Wah wah, the media is so unfair! "
Is that Obama talking about FOX News?
Posted by: Gary on June 19, 2009 12:59 PMAnd the more of our lives we turn over to the government, the more we'll have to beg them for whatever morsels they decide we get. More government = more lobbying by definition. And if they take the slightest personal offense, then they'll have the guards throw you out of the castle.
Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. She was paid more under a Republican.
Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. She was paid more under a Republican.
Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. She was paid more under a Republican.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 01:08 PMIf she had to take a pay cut to come work for McDermott what exactly does that say?
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 01:14 PM...it's so much easier for Jensen to link a sourced comment when I provided him the link in the first place way back @ 11. Just sayin'
Posted by: Rick D. on June 19, 2009 01:50 PMIn FY 2006, when working for Rep. Jo Ann Davis (Republican), she made $68,805.59. In FY 2008, when working for Rep. McDermott (LIEBERAL), she made $60,977.78.
$60,977.78 is less money than $68,805.59. The page with this information was linked many times during the discussion.
Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. She was paid more under a Republican.
The assumptions here that she is a Democrat are really stupid and do not comport with reality. She sounds like a very unpleasant person, regardless of her ideology.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 01:51 PMI first got that link in the Slog comment thread at slog.thestranger.com. Also, when that article appeared on Slog I Googled her name to send her an email expressing my disappointment that she works for my Representative and the page came up. But yeah, you're pretty good at using the Internet too!
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 01:57 PMOlbermann does his schtick on Bechton.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/anneschroeder/0609/Keith_Olbermann_reenacts_the_Liz__aka_Elizabeth_Becton__emailings_on_Countdown.html
Does this mean y'all are 'liberal'? snark.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on June 19, 2009 03:31 PMUm, John...Let's compare apples to apples and not bowling balls to grapefruits which you are doing.
By the chart provided, In only a 12 month period, Ms. Becton has received a total of $88,344.44 in compensation working for McDimwit. She only accumulated $85,597.27 in compensation over a 16 month period under the Republican Jo Ann Davis. So your numbers are wrong...or as Adam Sandler said to Bob Barker in Happy Gilmore...."THE PRICE IS WRONG, B*^
Um, John...Let's compare apples to apples and not bowling balls to grapefruits which you are doing.
By the chart provided, In only a 12 month period, Ms. Becton has received a total of $88,344.44 in compensation working for McDimwit. She only accumulated $85,597.27 in compensation over a 16 month period under the Republican Jo Ann Davis. So your numbers are wrong...or as Adam Sandler said to Bob Barker in Happy Gilmore...."THE PRICE IS WRONG, B*^
Besides that reality, she makes entirely too much to be a "secretary" with the tax payers footing the bill whether for a D or an R. We have Border patrol agents that risk their lives everyday for about 1/3 of that.
Posted by: Rick D. on June 19, 2009 03:43 PMHaven't we all worked with people like her? Truly obnoxious individuals that simply get a kick out of being mean. I stand my belief that most of those people end up being Democrats.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 04:11 PMThe last full quarter she worked for Republican Jo Ann Davis, she made $16,250, which annualizes (that means multiply by 4, for John Jensen) to $65,000.
The first full quarter she worked for McDermott, she made $20,700, which annualizes to $82,800--a 27% increase in less than 2 years.
In the latest quarter, she made $27,367, which annualizes to $109,468--a 32% increase in less than a year.
So, she has gone from an annualized salary of $65,000 at the end of 2006 under a Republican to $109,468 at the end of 2008 under a Democrat--a 68% increase in 2 years! Or an annualized increase of 30% a year!! Recession, what recession!
So, John Jensen and Mr Boy Scout, are you ready to own up to your MANY TIMES repeated error of "Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. She was paid more under a Republican."?
With what McDermott is paying her, if she wasn't a Democrat before, she probably is now!
Posted by: Bill H on June 19, 2009 04:31 PMAnyway, I'm sure everyone here gets a 30% raise every year, right?
Posted by: Bill H on June 19, 2009 04:40 PMThe point is that fools here started attacking her for being a democrat and how she is paid way too much under a democrat, since democrats waste money left and right. Everything you guys harped on has been proven to be farce except the fact that she sounds like a very unpleasant person.
Congressional compensation is very easy for you guys to determine since no one here has absolutely any idea what her responsibilities, duties, and hours are. Truly, telling someone else how much they should earn is a principle of the free market.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 04:52 PMNever thought I'd see the day.
What a coincidence...that description could fit most of the Dimocrats I am aquainted with.
Posted by: Saltherring on June 19, 2009 05:15 PMYou really nailed it. People who are out to make others do their bidding are very often angry, unhappy, mean, and judgmental.
They don't realize that life is difficult enough but much better when you resolve to mind your own business, take care of yourself,
and contribute to the betterment of the world rather than trying to manipulate it to your will.
If Becton had been working for a Republican, she would have likely been fired because most Republicans won't tolerate deliberately mean spirited people in their midst. Republicans are more likely to help the public than dictate to them. It is quite true that conservatives (as a group) are happier and more well adjusted people because they are grounded in faith, honesty, an integrity and they are less likely to chase illusions. Instead they focus on truly useful benefits for humanity like capitalism.
In contrast Liberals are all about trying to save the world from itself (global warming), re-invent reality (that socialism is a viable national economic model) defy human nature (that Diplomacy can ever replace military action), and change fundamental principles,(that humans learn and function better by being deliberately lied to). Most of these people actually believe that a well told lie is equal to the truth. They are driven to justify inherent dishonesty by telling themselves that they are only doing it to vindicate social "equality," or equality of outcomes.
Bill, I imagine that you would also be angry, unhappy, mean, and judgmental if your whole belief system was based on justifying lies.
McDermott and Becton were made for each other.
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on June 19, 2009 05:21 PMLiz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years. Liz worked for Republicans eight out of the last nine years.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 05:28 PMI guess he thinks he's making a point. I don't know any obnoxious Republicans, but I sure know a lot of obnoxious Democrats.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 05:44 PMIt's a public service.
The more you keep liberals occupied, the fewer crippled old ladies are mugged.
Yes, I'm disputing that. In 2006, she made $361.11 + $15,888.90 + $16,250.00 + $16,250.01 + $16,250.01 = $65,000.03.
In 2008, working 3 days for a Republican and the rest of the year for McDermott, she made $361.11 + $180.56 + $19,577.78 + $20,700.00 + $20,700.00 + $27,366.66 = $88,886.11.
$88,886.11 is MORE than $65,000.03. In fact it is 37% more! So I repeat, are you ready to admit that you were wrong, AGAIN in saying "She made more money in 2006 working for a Republican than she made in 2008 working for McDermott."
Posted by: Bill H on June 19, 2009 05:58 PMYou come here to comment on a blog about others coming here to comment on a blog? Interesting Hypocrisy model you've got working there, Patriot.
It's called free will. Maybe you've heard of it. If I need someone to mother me, I'll call my own, thanks.
You keep repeating that, obviously, but what difference does that make? It does nothing to support your argument against the statement that "If Becton had been working for a Republican, she would have likely been fired...". I think the point that was being made is that if she had done this while working for a Republican, she would have been fired. Repeating, ad nauseum, that she worked for Republicans in the past is irrelevant unless you can show that she demonstrated this idiocy when she worked for Republicans. Who knows, perhaps she did, but just saying that she worked for Republicans does nothing to refute the point.
Posted by: Bill H on June 19, 2009 06:09 PMTax Year 2008 $$88,886.11.
Tax Year 2006 $65,000.03.
Individuals are measured based on tax year, NOT Fiscal Year. You're just being silly by continuing to argue an untenable position...
Posted by: Bill H on June 19, 2009 06:14 PMNope, just your head again...
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on June 19, 2009 06:18 PMFY2006 + 1st qtr FY2007/ Rep = $85,597.27
FY2008 + 1st qtr FY2009/ Dem = $88,344.44
_________________________________
+ $2,700 under a democrat
Apples to apples John, not bowling balls to grapefruit.
Posted by: Rick D. on June 19, 2009 06:20 PMBill H & Rick D,
Such pettiness. Can you imagine having to work sitting next to a John Jensen...or having one for a next door neighbor...or as a member of your family? As my late Norwegian father used to say, "Uff-da".
Posted by: Saltherring on June 19, 2009 06:22 PMAnd none too soon. Telling other people what they should be doing is what liberals are all about. Snotty, condescending, and judgemental. I bet "Patriot" has a "kill your television" bumper sticker on the back of his Subaru.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 19, 2009 06:40 PMIt's the stupid assumption that Bill C, Amused by Liberals, and perhaps pudge made: She must be some life-long democrat because only a DEMOCRAT would act like this. The fact that for most of her career she's worked under Republicans trashes this assumption.
Further, the ridiculous and unprovable claim that, "if she had done this while working for a Republican, she would have been fired" is just not backed up by any evidence. Did her personality dramatically alter itself in the last year and a half? Did Cheney fire Scooter Libby for lying under oath? Did Ensign show reverence for his staff by sleeping with a staffer's wife? Get over your party being pure and clean and perfect and above fault.
What's more tragic is that some further derail into the personal faults of all democrats.
"Telling other people what they should be doing is what liberals are all about. Snotty, condescending, and judgemental."
"'She sounds like a very unpleasant person, regardless of her ideology.' What a coincidence...that description could fit most of the Dimocrats I am aquainted with."
"Truly obnoxious individuals that simply get a kick out of being mean. I stand my belief that most of those people end up being Democrats."
My God I hope you guys don't actually believe this bullcrap. The character of individuals has nearly nothing to do with political alignment. It's an extended ad hominem that basically results in you ignoring any good idea from the other side because, well, you hate them! That is bad for our country, and I wouldn't want to kick it with you guys during Thanksgiving. :P
Posted by: John Jensen on June 19, 2009 07:01 PM-
Yeah, I don't think my family would appreciate your prolific use of the F word nor your personal insults.
Who is Liz working for now?
Posted by: pbj on June 20, 2009 12:48 AM"She made more money in 2006 working for a Republican than she made in 2008 working for McDermott. $60,977.78 is less money than $68,805.59. Is anyone disputing that? "
Well she wasn't a rude bitch when she worked for Republicans. PROVE she was this way when she was serving Republicans. McDermott probably coached her to behave this way.
Posted by: pbj on June 20, 2009 12:51 AMSo basically you are saying Democrats are cheapskate low wage employers. Got it.
Posted by: pbj on June 20, 2009 01:48 AMAnd what "good idea" would that be, John?
Most conservatives don't "hate" Dimocrats, but we do hate the tired, old, leftist agenda they continually try to ram down our throats.
Posted by: Saltherring on June 20, 2009 06:38 AMWhat do you mean by an extended ad hominem?
Do you have any idea what ad hominem means?
You embarrass yourself.
Godspeed is addressing a Liberal about money saying that "it's my money we're talking about."
Can't put that one past a wily little stinker like Rizzo, he knows its only your money if he can't take it from you.
That would certainly explain Castro, Che, Hugo Chavez, Lenin, Stalin, the Palestinians that shoot missiles at innocent people from Gaza, the PETA nutcases that protest the throwing of deceased salmon at the Pike Place Market, and the Seattle Mayor who scares children at Christmas about how Santa won't have a home due to "global warming". It might also explain the communist nutcases that have run North Korea for decades.
My take? The character of individuals has everthing to do with their political alignment.
By "ran down our throats" you mean "get elected to implement." There is a strong democratic majority in this country because the people agree with their ideology. That's a whole lot of people who are obnoxious, anti-American socialists.
The trouble with living in a democracy is you have disagreement.
Posted by: John Jensen on June 21, 2009 12:57 AM